Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 3 cited by

Dark Matter Ultraviolet Freeze-in in General Reheating Scenarios

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Dark matter from ultraviolet freeze-in is set by two numbers that describe how the universe reheated: the equation-of-state $\omega$ and the temperature-scaling exponent $\alpha$.

desk verdict Useful general framework for UV freeze-in during reheating, but the background is internally inconsistent and the decay-yield formula has a negative coefficient in the canonical case; needs major revision before the parameter-space plots can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04774 v2 pith:YF5K4YXP submitted 2025-01-08 hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-th

Nicolás Bernal , Kuldeep Deka , Marta Losada This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phastro-ph.COhep-th
keywords darkmatterultravioletfreeze-inFIMPreheatinginflatondecaysgravitationalproductionrelicabundancetemperature
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper asks how dark matter produced by ultraviolet freeze-in—feebly interacting particles generated from the hottest part of the plasma without ever reaching equilibrium—depends on the unknown way the universe reheated after inflation. It parametrizes the reheating epoch by two power-law exponents, the inflaton equation-of-state $\omega$ and the temperature-scaling exponent $\alpha$, so that $H(a)\propto a^{-3(1+\omega)/2}$ and $T(a)=T_{\mathrm{rh}}(a_{\mathrm{rh}}/a)^{\alpha}$. Within that parametrization it derives closed-form relic yields for scattering rates $\gamma_a=T^k/\Lambda^{k-4}$ and for direct inflaton decays. The central result is a critical exponent $k_c=\frac{3}{2}\frac{\omega+3}{\alpha}$: production during reheating is boosted by an order-one factor, a logarithm, or a power of $T_I/T_{\mathrm{rh}}$ according to whether $kk_c$. The framework recovers earlier special cases and maps the viable $T_{\mathrm{rh}}$--$T_I$ regions for gravitational dark matter production.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a two-parameter model of reheating: $H(a)=H_{\mathrm{rh}}(a_{\mathrm{rh}}/a)^{3(1+\omega)/2}$ and $T(a)=T_{\mathrm{rh}}(a_{\mathrm{rh}}/a)^{\alpha}$ during $a_I\le a\le a_{\mathrm{rh}}$, together with an effective inflaton decay width $\Gamma(a)=4(1-\alpha)H_{\mathrm{rh}}(a_{\mathrm{rh}}/a)^{(8\alpha-3(\omega+1))/2}$ chosen to realize that temperature law. This ansatz turns the dark-matter Boltzmann equation into a single integral that can be evaluated in closed form. The comparison point is the critical exponent $k_c=\frac{3}{2}\frac{\omega+3}{\alpha}$; it determines whether the production is dominated near $T_{\mathrm{rh}}$ ($k<k_c$), spread logarithmically over the whole reheating interval ($k=k_c$), or dominated near $T_I$ with a power-law enhancement ($k>k_c$). For decay production the analogous dividing line is $\alpha=\frac{3}{4}(1+\omega)$.

What would settle it

Take any explicit inflaton potential and decay or annihilation operator, solve the coupled background and DM Boltzmann equations with time-dependent $\omega(a)$ and $\alpha(a)$, and compare the final yield to the corresponding branch of Eqs. (3.17)--(3.24). If the ratio differs from one by more than an order-one factor for the same nominal $(\omega,\alpha)$, the constant-power-law description of reheating fails and the paper's central classification is not realized in that model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors establish that the relic abundance from UV freeze-in during reheating is controlled by the reheating dynamics through two parameters, and they give analytic expressions for the yield at the end of reheating. For a scattering rate $\gamma_a=T^k/\Lambda^{k-4}$, the contribution produced during reheating is the post-reheating yield prefactor multiplied by $1/[\alpha(k_c-k)]$, $(1/\alpha)\ln(T_I/T_{\mathrm{rh}})$, or $(1/\alpha)(T_I/T_{\mathrm{rh}})^{k-k_c}/(k-k_c)$ depending on whether $k<k_c$, $k=k_c$, or $k>k_c$. Heavy dark matter with mass between $T_{\mathrm{rh}}$ and $T_I$ is handled by cutting off the integral at $T=m$, yielding analogous formulas in terms of $m/T_{\mathrm{rh}}$ or $T_I/m$. For inflaton decays the same distinction is governed by $\alpha=\frac{3}{4}(1+\omega)$: the yield gains a logarithm at that value, while the would-be power-law branch lies in the non-viable reheating region. Applied to gravitational production from SM scatterings ($k=8$) and from inflaton scatterings (effective $k=6/\alpha$), the formulas produce $(T_{\mathrm{rh}},T_I)$ parameter-space maps for the observed relic density, with CMB constraints on $T_I$ included.

Load-bearing premise

The whole argument rests on reheating being a single power-law epoch with constant $\omega$ and $\alpha$; if the inflaton's equation of state or the bath-temperature exponent changes with scale factor, or if reheating is non-perturbative, the analytic yields no longer apply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For fixed coupling scale and dark-matter mass, the reheating temperature required to match $\Omega h^2\simeq 0.12$ drops by powers of $T_I/T_{\mathrm{rh}}$ when $k>k_c$ and $\alpha>0$, opening regions of much lower $T_{\mathrm{rh}}$ than instantaneous-reheating estimates allow.
  • When $k=k_c$ the boost is only logarithmic, $\ln(T_I/T_{\mathrm{rh}})$, so $T_{\mathrm{rh}}$ moves weakly as $T_I$ changes; when $k<k_c$ the yield is essentially independent of $T_I$, so the required $T_{\mathrm{rh}}$ is nearly a vertical line in the ($T_{\mathrm{rh}},T_I$) plane.
  • For gravitational SM production ($k=8$), the standard case $\omega=0$, $\alpha=3/8$ is recovered, while $\alpha=3/4$ gives $k>k_c$ and allows $T_{\mathrm{rh}}$ values orders of magnitude lower.
  • For gravitational inflaton scattering the production exponent is $k=6/\alpha$, so the critical condition becomes a critical equation of state $\omega_c=1$; power-law enhancement appears for both $\omega<1$ and $\omega>1$.
  • CMB constraints on the inflationary Hubble scale restrict the high-$T_I$ end of the allowed parameter space, so tensor-mode measurements can directly shrink the viable dark-matter regions.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If future measurements pin down the reheating exponents $\omega$ and $\alpha$—for example through a gravitational-wave background—the same formulas convert that information directly into a prediction for the UV freeze-in relic density; conversely, fixing the DM abundance turns the $T_{\mathrm{rh}}$–$T_I$ maps into a reconstruction of the reheating history.
  • The single-power-law assumption is the main limitation: a realistic reheating with preheating, backreaction, or time-varying exponents would require numerical integration, and the sharp $k_c$ taxonomy could become a crossover.
  • The same $k_c$ classification should apply to other UV-sensitive relics produced by non-renormalizable operators, such as gravitinos or axions, whenever their rates can be written in the $T^k/\Lambda^{k-4}$ form.
  • A natural extension is to include momentum-dependent or threshold-suppressed production rates, where the clean power-law/log/order-one split would be smoothed out by additional scales.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a general power-law parametrization of the reheating epoch, with inflaton energy density scaling as a^{-3(1+ω)} and SM temperature scaling as a^{-α}, and derives analytic expressions for UV freeze-in dark matter production from both thermal scatterings and direct inflaton decays. The authors distinguish light and heavy DM, recover several known limits, and apply the framework to gravitational DM production from SM and inflaton scatterings, presenting parameter-space maps for the observed relic density subject to CMB constraints.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a useful unified treatment linking reheating dynamics parametrized by (ω, α) to UV freeze-in yields, with explicit classification of order-one, logarithmic, and power-law enhancements controlled by the critical exponent k_c = 3(ω+3)/(2α). The recovery of earlier results, the systematic mapping of viable parameter regions, and the concrete gravitational DM examples are valuable for future phenomenological studies. The analytic derivations are transparent enough for independent checking, and the inclusion of CMB bounds on T_I is a strength.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 2, Eqs. (2.2)–(2.7)] The assumed power-law background does not solve the coupled Boltzmann system (2.4)–(2.5). Substituting ρ_φ ∝ a^{-3(1+ω)} into Eq. (2.4) gives a zero left-hand side, not -Γρ_φ, so the inflaton energy density is never depleted by the decay that sources radiation in Eq. (2.5). This is not merely a formal issue: for the standard case ω=0, α=3/8, Eq. (2.6) yields Γ/H_rh = 5/2, and integrating Γ dt from a_I to a_rh gives 5/3, implying an average decay probability greater than one. Consequently, the decay yields in Eqs. (3.22) and (3.24) can exceed the total number of DM particles available from the initial inflaton population, and the normalization of all yields near a_rh inherits an uncontrolled O(1) error.
  2. [Eq. (3.22), Sec. 3.2.2] For the physically central case ω=0, α=3/8, the first branch of Eq. (3.22) evaluates to (4α-1)/(4α-3(1+ω)) = (1/2)/(-3/2) = -1/3, giving a negative DM yield. Since a yield cannot be negative, this signals a sign error in the derivation; the denominator should presumably be 3(1+ω)-4α on this branch. Because Section 3.2.2 and the decay-based contour plots in Figs. 4 and 6 rely on Eqs. (3.22) and (3.24), the decay phenomenology as presented is not correct and needs to be rederived.
  3. [Sec. 2, Eq. (2.2)] The Hubble rate during reheating in Eq. (2.2) omits ρ_R, despite the definition of T_rh requiring ρ_R(a_rh) = ρ_φ(a_rh). Thus for a approaching a_rh, H is underestimated by a factor up to sqrt(2), which introduces order-one errors in the scattering yields of Eqs. (3.15) and (3.17) in the regime k < k_c where production peaks near T_rh. The paper should either solve the background equations consistently or explicitly restrict the power-law parametrization to the era with Γ ≪ H and match onto radiation domination.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Eq. (2.6) and surrounding text] The condition 'α ≤ 1' and the possible sign of the exponent (8α-3(ω+1))/2 deserve a brief discussion, since Γ(a) should remain nonnegative and finite across the parameter space shown in Fig. 1.
  2. [Fig. 1 caption] The red region labeled 'non-viable reheating' is defined by α > 3(1+ω)/4, but the caption does not state this condition; please add it for clarity.
  3. [Sec. 4.2, Eq. (4.2)] The statement that 'the dependence in ω cancels out' in Eq. (4.2) is not immediately obvious from the displayed expression and deserves a short derivation or a clarifying comment, particularly because ρ_φ and m_φ both depend on a through ω.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the analytic yields follow from explicitly stated power-law assumptions, and the parameter-space figures impose the observed relic density as a benchmark constraint.

full rationale

The central results (3.15)-(3.24) are obtained by direct integration of the DM Boltzmann equation dN/da = a^2 gamma/H in the explicitly declared power-law background H(a) = H_rh(a_rh/a)^{3(1+omega)/2} and T(a) = T_rh(a_rh/a)^alpha. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction: the relic-density contours in Figs. 4-6 are presented as 'parameter space required to fit the entire DM abundance', i.e., as solutions of m Y = Omega h^2 rho_c/s_0, which is a standard benchmark application rather than a circular input. The self-citations [77-79] in Eqs. (2.2), (2.6), and (2.7) introduce the reheating parametrization as an assumption and are not used as an external uniqueness theorem or as independent evidence for the DM yield. The formalism also recovers earlier published special cases (e.g., [104] and [105]) as consistency checks, which is a normal validation step. The internal-consistency concern raised by the skeptic, namely that the assumed H(a) and nonzero Gamma(a) do not jointly satisfy Eq. (2.4), is a physical correctness issue, not a circularity: it does not identify an output that is equal to an input by construction or a fitted parameter that is presented as a prediction. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained once the stated power-law parametrization is accepted.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or conserved quantities. DM is assumed to exist and the new content is a two-parameter phenomenological framework for reheating. The central result therefore rests on the validity of the power-law ansatz and on the effective parameters that describe the production rate, not on new entity content.

free parameters (7)
  • omega (equation-of-state parameter) = scanned, e.g. 0, 1/3
    Sets the Hubble rate scaling during reheating; not fitted to data.
  • alpha (temperature scaling exponent) = scanned from negative values to 3(1+omega)/4
    Sets the SM temperature evolution during reheating; chosen per scenario.
  • k = 8 for gravitational SM scattering; 6/alpha for inflaton scattering
    Temperature power in the freeze-in rate; fixed by the production operator.
  • Lambda (effective scale) = M_P/C_g^{1/4} in SM-scattering example
    Suppression scale of the non-renormalizable operator; taken from the gravitational strength.
  • C = x Br/m_phi = scanned as C^{-1} from 10^10 to 10^30 GeV
    Decay parameter; combines number of DM particles per decay, branching fraction and inflaton mass.
  • DM mass m = 10^12 GeV in figures
    Mass chosen to illustrate parameter regions; light and heavy cases treated separately.
  • inflaton mass m_phi^rh = 10^13 GeV in inflaton-scattering figures
    Mass of inflaton at end of reheating; sets the decay kinematics and gravitational scattering rate.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Reheating is described by power laws H(a) = H_rh (a_rh/a)^{3(1+omega)/2} and T(a) = T_rh (a_rh/a)^alpha for a_I <= a <= a_rh.
    Section 2, Eqs. (2.2) and (2.7). This is the central modeling ansatz; if real reheating is not a pure power law, the analytic results do not apply.
  • ad hoc to paper The effective inflaton decay width Gamma(a) is chosen as Eq. (2.6) so that the radiation energy equation yields the assumed T(a) power law.
    Eq. (2.6) is not derived from a microphysical inflaton model; it is the effective width that reproduces T proportional to a^{-alpha}.
  • domain assumption DM production is described by freeze-in: no DM annihilation, no backreaction, no dark-sector thermalization.
    Section 3.1 and after Eq. (3.3); explicitly assumed to ignore number-changing processes in the dark sector.
  • domain assumption For decays, the inflaton mass evolves as m_phi(a) = m_phi^rh (a_rh/a)^{3omega}.
    Eq. (3.7); needed for Eq. (3.8) and the decay scenarios, represents coherent oscillation in a non-quadratic potential.
  • domain assumption Gravitational production rates from SM or inflaton scattering are taken from prior literature.
    Eqs. (4.1) and (4.2), with coefficients C_g and 1/(64 pi) from Refs. [29,32-34] and [47-49,53,86].
  • domain assumption The inflationary Hubble scale obeys the BICEP/Keck bound H_I <= 2.0 x 10^{-5} M_P, translated to a constraint on T_I via Eq. (2.8).
    Section 2, Eq. (2.8); external observational constraint used to shade excluded regions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dark Matter Ultraviolet Freeze-in in General Reheating Scenarios." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YF5K4YXP

@misc{pith2026250104774,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dark Matter Ultraviolet Freeze-in in General Reheating Scenarios},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YF5K4YXP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04774}
}
read the original abstract

The dynamics of cosmic reheating, that is, on how the energy stored in the inflaton is transferred to the standard model (SM) thermal bath, is largely unknown. In this work, we show that the phenomenology of the nonbaryonic dark matter (DM) ultraviolet freeze-in production strongly depends on the dynamics of the cosmic-reheating era. Using a general parametrization for the Hubble expansion rate and SM temperature, we thoroughly investigate DM production during reheating, not only recovering earlier findings that focused on specific cases, but also exploring alternative scenarios. Additionally, we derive a generalized framework for DM production via inflaton decays and identify the viable parameter space, while simultaneously addressing constraints from CMB observations. As illustrative examples, we explore gravitational DM production through scatterings of SM particles or inflatons, deriving well-defined parameter regions for these scenarios.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Seesaw Cosmology

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    In seesaw reheating, the post-inflation universe can pass through four alternating matter/radiation eras, with the Standard Model temperature falling as a^{-1/4} and then a^{-3/8}, which changes dark-matter production.

  2. micrOMEGAs 7: Beyond standard cosmology

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    The micrOMEGAs dark-matter package now solves Boltzmann equations with user-defined expansion and entropy histories, adds sub-GeV hadronic annihilation, and updates CMB, dwarf-galaxy, LZ, and CMS constraints.

  3. Primordial Gravitational Waves from Phase Transitions during Reheating

    astro-ph.CO 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Phase transitions happening during reheating can produce gravitational-wave signals that are delayed, prolonged, and shifted in amplitude and frequency by orders of magnitude compared with standard cosmology.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

113 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Planck collaboration, Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters , Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6 [ 1807.06209]

    arXiv 2020

  2. [2]

    Cirelli, A

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia and J. Zupan, Dark Matter , 2406.01705

    arXiv

  3. [3]

    Arcadi, M

    G. Arcadi, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini, M. Pierre et al., The waning of the WIMP? A review of models, searches, and constraints , Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 203 [1703.07364]

    arXiv 2018

  4. [4]

    Roszkowski, E.M

    L. Roszkowski, E.M. Sessolo and S. Trojanowski, WIMP dark matter candidates and searches—current status and future prospects, Rept. Prog. Phys. 81 (2018) 066201 [1707.06277]

    arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    Arcadi, D

    G. Arcadi, D. Cabo-Almeida, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini et al., The Waning of the WIMP: Endgame? , 2403.15860

    arXiv

  6. [6]

    McDonald, Thermally generated gauge singlet scalars as selfinteracting dark matter , Phys

    J. McDonald, Thermally generated gauge singlet scalars as selfinteracting dark matter , Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 091304 [ hep-ph/0106249]

    arXiv 2002

  7. [7]

    Choi and L

    K.-Y. Choi and L. Roszkowski, E-WIMPs, AIP Conf. Proc. 805 (2005) 30 [hep-ph/0511003]

    arXiv 2005

  8. [8]

    Kusenko, Sterile neutrinos, dark matter, and the pulsar velocities in models with a Higgs singlet, Phys

    A. Kusenko, Sterile neutrinos, dark matter, and the pulsar velocities in models with a Higgs singlet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 241301 [ hep-ph/0609081]

    arXiv 2006

Show all 113 references
  1. [9]

    Petraki and A

    K. Petraki and A. Kusenko, Dark-matter sterile neutrinos in models with a gauge singlet in the Higgs sector , Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 065014 [ 0711.4646]

    2008 arXiv

  2. [10]

    L.J. Hall, K. Jedamzik, J. March-Russell and S.M. West, Freeze-In Production of FIMP Dark Matter , JHEP 03 (2010) 080 [ 0911.1120]. – 16 –

    2010 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Bernal, M

    N. Bernal, M. Heikinheimo, T. Tenkanen, K. Tuominen and V. Vaskonen, The Dawn of FIMP Dark Matter: A Review of Models and Constraints , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 32 (2017) 1730023 [1706.07442]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Elahi, C

    F. Elahi, C. Kolda and J. Unwin, UltraViolet Freeze-in, JHEP 03 (2015) 048 [ 1410.6157]

    2015 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Giudice, E.W

    G.F. Giudice, E.W. Kolb and A. Riotto, Largest temperature of the radiation era and its cosmological implications, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 023508 [ hep-ph/0005123]

    2001 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Kofman, A.D

    L. Kofman, A.D. Linde and A.A. Starobinsky, Towards the theory of reheating after inflation, Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 3258 [ hep-ph/9704452]

    1997 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Allahverdi et al., The First Three Seconds: a Review of Possible Expansion Histories of the Early Universe , Open J.Astrophys

    R. Allahverdi et al., The First Three Seconds: a Review of Possible Expansion Histories of the Early Universe , Open J.Astrophys. 4 (2021) [ 2006.16182]

    2021 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Batell et al., Conversations and Deliberations: Non-Standard Cosmological Epochs and Expansion Histories, 2411.04780

    B. Batell et al., Conversations and Deliberations: Non-Standard Cosmological Epochs and Expansion Histories, 2411.04780

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    Hasegawa, N

    T. Hasegawa, N. Hiroshima, K. Kohri, R.S.L. Hansen, T. Tram and S. Hannestad, MeV-scale reheating temperature and thermalization of oscillating neutrinos by radiative and hadronic decays of massive particles , JCAP 12 (2019) 012 [ 1908.10189]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Spokoiny, Deflationary universe scenario , Phys

    B. Spokoiny, Deflationary universe scenario , Phys. Lett. B 315 (1993) 40 [ gr-qc/9306008]

    1993 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Ferreira and M

    P.G. Ferreira and M. Joyce, Cosmology with a primordial scaling field , Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 023503 [ astro-ph/9711102]

    1998 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Khoury, B.A

    J. Khoury, B.A. Ovrut, P.J. Steinhardt and N. Turok, The Ekpyrotic universe: Colliding branes and the origin of the hot big bang , Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 123522 [hep-th/0103239]

    2001 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Khoury, P.J

    J. Khoury, P.J. Steinhardt and N. Turok, Designing cyclic universe models , Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 031302 [ hep-th/0307132]

    2004 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Gasperini and G

    M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano, The Pre-big bang scenario in string cosmology , Phys. Rept. 373 (2003) 1 [ hep-th/0207130]

    2003 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Erickson, D.H

    J.K. Erickson, D.H. Wesley, P.J. Steinhardt and N. Turok, Kasner and mixmaster behavior in universes with equation of state w ≥ 1, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 063514 [hep-th/0312009]

    2004 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Barrow and K

    J.D. Barrow and K. Yamamoto, Anisotropic Pressures at Ultra-stiff Singularities and the Stability of Cyclic Universes , Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 063516 [ 1004.4767]

    2010 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Ijjas and P.J

    A. Ijjas and P.J. Steinhardt, A new kind of cyclic universe , Phys. Lett. B 795 (2019) 666 [1904.08022]

    2019 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Scherrer, How slowly can the early Universe expand? , Phys

    R.J. Scherrer, How slowly can the early Universe expand? , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 103516 [2209.03421]

    2022 arXiv

  19. [27]

    R.T. Co, E. Gonzalez and K. Harigaya, Increasing Temperature toward the Completion of Reheating, JCAP 11 (2020) 038 [ 2007.04328]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Y. Ema, R. Jinno, K. Mukaida and K. Nakayama, Gravitational Effects on Inflaton Decay , JCAP 05 (2015) 038 [ 1502.02475]

    2015 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Garny, M

    M. Garny, M. Sandora and M.S. Sloth, Planckian Interacting Massive Particles as Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 101302 [ 1511.03278]

    2016 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Tang and Y.-L

    Y. Tang and Y.-L. Wu, Pure Gravitational Dark Matter, Its Mass and Signatures , Phys. Lett. B 758 (2016) 402 [ 1604.04701]. – 17 –

    2016 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Y. Ema, R. Jinno, K. Mukaida and K. Nakayama, Gravitational particle production in oscillating backgrounds and its cosmological implications , Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 063517 [1604.08898]

    2016 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Tang and Y.-L

    Y. Tang and Y.-L. Wu, On Thermal Gravitational Contribution to Particle Production and Dark Matter , Phys. Lett. B 774 (2017) 676 [ 1708.05138]

    2017 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Garny, A

    M. Garny, A. Palessandro, M. Sandora and M.S. Sloth, Theory and Phenomenology of Planckian Interacting Massive Particles as Dark Matter , JCAP 02 (2018) 027 [1709.09688]

    2018 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Bernal, M

    N. Bernal, M. Dutra, Y. Mambrini, K. Olive, M. Peloso and M. Pierre, Spin-2 Portal Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 115020 [ 1803.01866]

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Y. Ema, K. Nakayama and Y. Tang, Production of Purely Gravitational Dark Matter , JHEP 09 (2018) 135 [ 1804.07471]

    2018 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Almeida, N

    J.P.B. Almeida, N. Bernal, J. Rubio and T. Tenkanen, Hidden inflation dark matter , JCAP 03 (2019) 012 [ 1811.09640]

    2019 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Y. Ema, K. Nakayama and Y. Tang, Production of purely gravitational dark matter: the case of fermion and vector boson , JHEP 07 (2019) 060 [ 1903.10973]

    2019 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Chianese, B

    M. Chianese, B. Fu and S.F. King, Impact of Higgs portal on gravity-mediated production of superheavy dark matter , JCAP 06 (2020) 019 [ 2003.07366]

    2020 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Bernal, J

    N. Bernal, J. Rubio and H. Veerm¨ ae,Boosting Ultraviolet Freeze-in in NO Models , JCAP 06 (2020) 047 [ 2004.13706]

    2020 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Ahmed, B

    A. Ahmed, B. Grzadkowski and A. Socha, Gravitational production of vector dark matter , JHEP 08 (2020) 059 [ 2005.01766]

    2020 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Bernal, J

    N. Bernal, J. Rubio and H. Veerm¨ ae,UV Freeze-in in Starobinsky Inflation , JCAP 10 (2020) 021 [ 2006.02442]

    2020 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Chianese, B

    M. Chianese, B. Fu and S.F. King, Interplay between neutrino and gravity portals for FIMP dark matter , JCAP 01 (2021) 034 [ 2009.01847]

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Kolb and A.J

    E.W. Kolb and A.J. Long, Completely dark photons from gravitational particle production during the inflationary era , JHEP 03 (2021) 283 [ 2009.03828]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Bernal and ´O

    N. Bernal and ´O. Zapata, Gravitational dark matter production: primordial black holes and UV freeze-in, Phys. Lett. B 815 (2021) 136129 [ 2011.02510]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [45]

    M. Redi, A. Tesi and H. Tillim, Gravitational Production of a Conformal Dark Sector , JHEP 05 (2021) 010 [ 2011.10565]

    2021 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Ling and A.J

    S. Ling and A.J. Long, Superheavy scalar dark matter from gravitational particle production in α-attractor models of inflation , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 103532 [ 2101.11621]

    2021 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Mambrini and K.A

    Y. Mambrini and K.A. Olive, Gravitational Production of Dark Matter during Reheating , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 115009 [ 2102.06214]

    2021 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Bernal and C.S

    N. Bernal and C.S. Fong, Dark matter and leptogenesis from gravitational production , JCAP 06 (2021) 028 [ 2103.06896]

    2021 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Barman and N

    B. Barman and N. Bernal, Gravitational SIMPs, JCAP 06 (2021) 011 [ 2104.10699]

    2021 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Barman, N

    B. Barman, N. Bernal, A. Das and R. Roshan, Non-minimally coupled vector boson dark matter, JCAP 01 (2022) 047 [ 2108.13447]. – 18 –

    2022 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Haque and D

    M.R. Haque and D. Maity, Gravitational dark matter: Free streaming and phase space distribution, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 023506 [ 2112.14668]

    2022 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Cl´ ery, Y

    S. Cl´ ery, Y. Mambrini, K.A. Olive and S. Verner,Gravitational portals in the early Universe, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 075005 [ 2112.15214]

    2022 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Barman, N

    B. Barman, N. Bernal, Y. Xu and ´O. Zapata, Ultraviolet freeze-in with a time-dependent inflaton decay, JCAP 07 (2022) 019 [ 2202.12906]

    2022 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Cl´ ery, Y

    S. Cl´ ery, Y. Mambrini, K.A. Olive, A. Shkerin and S. Verner, Gravitational portals with nonminimal couplings, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 095042 [ 2203.02004]

    2022 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Garc ´ ıa, M

    M.A.G. Garc ´ ıa, M. Pierre and S. Verner,Scalar dark matter production from preheating and structure formation constraints, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 043530 [ 2206.08940]

    2023 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Kaneta, S.M

    K. Kaneta, S.M. Lee and K.-y. Oda, Boltzmann or Bogoliubov? Approaches compared in gravitational particle production, JCAP 09 (2022) 018 [ 2206.10929]

    2022 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Basso, D.J.H

    E. Basso, D.J.H. Chung, E.W. Kolb and A.J. Long, Quantum interference in gravitational particle production, JHEP 12 (2022) 108 [ 2209.01713]

    2022 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Barman, S

    B. Barman, S. Cl´ ery, R.T. Co, Y. Mambrini and K.A. Olive, Gravity as a portal to reheating, leptogenesis and dark matter , JHEP 12 (2022) 072 [ 2210.05716]

    2022 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Haque, D

    M.R. Haque, D. Maity and R. Mondal, WIMPs, FIMPs, and Inflaton phenomenology via reheating, CMB and ∆Nef f, JHEP 09 (2023) 012 [ 2301.01641]

    2023 arXiv

  52. [60]

    E.W. Kolb, S. Ling, A.J. Long and R.A. Rosen, Cosmological gravitational particle production of massive spin-2 particles , JHEP 05 (2023) 181 [ 2302.04390]

    2023 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Garc ´ ıa, M

    M.A.G. Garc ´ ıa, M. Pierre and S. Verner,Isocurvature constraints on scalar dark matter production from the inflaton , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 123508 [ 2303.07359]

    2023 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Garc ´ ıa, M

    M.A.G. Garc ´ ıa, M. Pierre and S. Verner,New window into gravitationally produced scalar dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 115024 [ 2305.14446]

    2023 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Kaneta, W

    K. Kaneta, W. Ke, Y. Mambrini, K.A. Olive and S. Verner, Gravitational production of spin-3/2 particles during reheating , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 115027 [ 2309.15146]

    2023

  56. [64]

    Barman, N

    B. Barman, N. Bernal and J. Rubio, Rescuing gravitational-reheating in chaotic inflation , JCAP 05 (2024) 072 [ 2310.06039]

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Garc ´ ıa, K

    M.A.G. Garc ´ ıa, K. Kaneta, W. Ke, Y. Mambrini, K.A. Olive and S. Verner, The role of vectors in reheating, JCAP 06 (2024) 014 [ 2311.14794]

    2024 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Kolb and A.J

    E.W. Kolb and A.J. Long, Cosmological gravitational particle production and its implications for cosmological relics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 96 (2024) 045005 [ 2312.09042]

    2024 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Racco, S

    D. Racco, S. Verner and W. Xue, Gravitational production of heavy particles during and after inflation , JHEP 09 (2024) 129 [ 2405.13883]

    2024 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Dorsch, L

    G.C. Dorsch, L. Miranda and N. Yokomizo, Gravitational reheating in Starobinsky inflation , JCAP 11 (2024) 050 [ 2406.04161]

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Choi, M.A.G

    G. Choi, M.A.G. Garc ´ ıa, W. Ke, Y. Mambrini, K.A. Olive and S. Verner, Inflaton production of scalar dark matter through fluctuations and scattering , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 083512 [ 2406.06696]

    2024 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Verner, Nonminimal Superheavy Dark Matter , 2408.11889

    S. Verner, Nonminimal Superheavy Dark Matter , 2408.11889. – 19 –

    arXiv

  63. [71]

    Jenks, E.W

    L. Jenks, E.W. Kolb and K. Thyme, Gravitational Particle Production of Scalars: Analytic and Numerical Approaches Including Early Reheating , 2410.03938

    arXiv

  64. [72]

    H.M. Lee, M. Park and V. Sanz, Gravity-Mediated Dark Matter at a low reheating temperature, 2412.07850

    arXiv

  65. [73]

    Henrich, Y

    S.E. Henrich, Y. Mambrini and K.A. Olive, Aspects of Gravitational Portals and Freeze-in during Reheating, 2412.13288

    arXiv

  66. [74]

    Xu, Probing Gravitational Dark Matter with Ultra-high Frequency Gravitational Waves , 2412.21137

    Y. Xu, Probing Gravitational Dark Matter with Ultra-high Frequency Gravitational Waves , 2412.21137

    arXiv

  67. [75]

    Maleknejad and J

    A. Maleknejad and J. Kopp, Weyl fermion creation by cosmological gravitational wave background at 1-loop, JHEP 01 (2025) 023 [ 2406.01534]

    2025 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Drees, F

    M. Drees, F. Hajkarim and E.R. Schmitz, The Effects of QCD Equation of State on the Relic Density of WIMP Dark Matter , JCAP 06 (2015) 025 [ 1503.03513]

    2015 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Bernal, K

    N. Bernal, K. Deka and M. Losada, Thermal dark matter with low-temperature reheating , JCAP 09 (2024) 024 [ 2406.17039]

    2024 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Bernal and Y

    N. Bernal and Y. Xu, Thermal gravitational waves during reheating , JHEP 01 (2025) 137 [2410.21385]

    2025 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Bernal, C.S

    N. Bernal, C.S. Fong and ´O. Zapata, Probing low-reheating scenarios with minimal freeze-in dark matter , 2412.04550

    arXiv

  72. [80]

    Turner, Coherent Scalar Field Oscillations in an Expanding Universe , Phys

    M.S. Turner, Coherent Scalar Field Oscillations in an Expanding Universe , Phys. Rev. D 28 (1983) 1243

    1983

  73. [81]

    BICEP, Keckcollaboration, Improved Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season , Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021) 151301 [ 2110.00483]

    2021

  74. [82]

    Starobinsky, A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity , Phys

    A.A. Starobinsky, A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity , Phys. Lett. B 91 (1980) 99

    1980

  75. [83]

    Drees and Y

    M. Drees and Y. Xu, Small field polynomial inflation: reheating, radiative stability and lower bound, JCAP 09 (2021) 012 [ 2104.03977]

    2021 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Bernal and Y

    N. Bernal and Y. Xu, Polynomial inflation and dark matter , Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 877 [2106.03950]

    2021 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Drees and Y

    M. Drees and Y. Xu, Large field polynomial inflation: parameter space, predictions and (double) eternal nature , JCAP 12 (2022) 005 [ 2209.07545]

    2022 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Bernal, J

    N. Bernal, J. Harz, M.A. Mojahed and Y. Xu, Graviton- and inflaton-mediated dark matter production after large field polynomial inflation , Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 043517 [2406.19447]

    2025 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Kallosh and A

    R. Kallosh and A. Linde, Universality Class in Conformal Inflation , JCAP 07 (2013) 002 [1306.5220]

    2013 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Kallosh and A

    R. Kallosh and A. Linde, Non-minimal Inflationary Attractors , JCAP 10 (2013) 033 [1307.7938]

    2013 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Garc ´ ıa, K

    M.A.G. Garc ´ ıa, K. Kaneta, Y. Mambrini and K.A. Olive,Inflaton Oscillations and Post-Inflationary Reheating, JCAP 04 (2021) 012 [ 2012.10756]. – 20 –

    2021 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Xu, Constraining axion and ALP dark matter from misalignment during reheating , Phys

    Y. Xu, Constraining axion and ALP dark matter from misalignment during reheating , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 083536 [ 2308.15322]

    2023 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Barman, N

    B. Barman, N. Bernal and Y. Xu, Resonant reheating, JCAP 08 (2024) 014 [ 2404.16090]

    2024 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Chowdhury and A

    D. Chowdhury and A. Hait, Thermalization in the presence of a time-dependent dissipation and its impact on dark matter production , JHEP 09 (2023) 085 [ 2302.06654]

    2023 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Cosme, F

    C. Cosme, F. Costa and O. Lebedev, Temperature evolution in the Early Universe and freeze-in at stronger coupling , JCAP 06 (2024) 031 [ 2402.04743]

    2024 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Kaneta, Y

    K. Kaneta, Y. Mambrini and K.A. Olive, Radiative production of nonthermal dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 063508 [ 1901.04449]

    2019 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Barman, N

    B. Barman, N. Bernal, Y. Xu and ´O. Zapata, Bremsstrahlung-induced gravitational waves in monomial potentials during reheating , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 083524 [ 2305.16388]

    2023 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Bernal, Boosting Freeze-in through Thermalization, JCAP 10 (2020) 006 [ 2005.08988]

    N. Bernal, Boosting Freeze-in through Thermalization, JCAP 10 (2020) 006 [ 2005.08988]

    2020 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Bhattiprolu, R

    P.N. Bhattiprolu, R. McGehee and A. Pierce, Dark sink enhances the direct detection of freeze-in dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) L031702 [ 2312.14152]

    2024 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Bhattiprolu, R

    P.N. Bhattiprolu, R. McGehee, E. Petrosky and A. Pierce, Sub-MeV Dark Sink Dark Matter, 2408.07744

    arXiv

  91. [99]

    Particle Data Groupcollaboration, Review of particle physics , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 030001

    2024

  92. [100]

    Cosme, F

    C. Cosme, F. Costa and O. Lebedev, Freeze-in at stronger coupling, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 075038 [ 2306.13061]

    2024 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Koivunen, O

    N. Koivunen, O. Lebedev and M. Raidal, Probing sterile neutrino freeze-in at stronger coupling, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) 1234 [ 2403.15533]

    2024 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Arcadi, F

    G. Arcadi, F. Costa, A. Goudelis and O. Lebedev, Higgs portal dark matter freeze-in at stronger coupling: observational benchmarks , JHEP 07 (2024) 044 [ 2405.03760]

    2024 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Arcadi, D

    G. Arcadi, D. Cabo-Almeida and O. Lebedev, Z’-mediated dark matter freeze-in at stronger coupling, Phys. Lett. B 861 (2025) 139268 [ 2409.02191]

    2025 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Garc ´ ıa, Y

    M.A.G. Garc ´ ıa, Y. Mambrini, K.A. Olive and M. Peloso,Enhancement of the Dark Matter Abundance Before Reheating: Applications to Gravitino Dark Matter , Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 103510 [ 1709.01549]

    2017 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Bernal, F

    N. Bernal, F. Elahi, C. Maldonado and J. Unwin, Ultraviolet Freeze-in and Non-Standard Cosmologies, JCAP 11 (2019) 026 [ 1909.07992]

    2019

  98. [106]

    Windchime collaboration, Snowmass 2021 White Paper: The Windchime Project , in Snowmass 2021 , 3, 2022 [ 2203.07242]

    2021 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Ghiglieri and M

    J. Ghiglieri and M. Laine, Gravitational wave background from Standard Model physics: Qualitative features, JCAP 07 (2015) 022 [ 1504.02569]

    2015 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Ghiglieri, G

    J. Ghiglieri, G. Jackson, M. Laine and Y. Zhu, Gravitational wave background from Standard Model physics: Complete leading order , JHEP 07 (2020) 092 [ 2004.11392]

    2020 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Ringwald, J

    A. Ringwald, J. Sch¨ utte-Engel and C. Tamarit,Gravitational Waves as a Big Bang Thermometer, JCAP 03 (2021) 054 [ 2011.04731]

    2021 arXiv

  102. [110]

    F. Muia, F. Quevedo, A. Schachner and G. Villa, Testing BSM physics with gravitational waves, JCAP 09 (2023) 006 [ 2303.01548]. – 21 –

    2023 arXiv

  103. [111]

    Villa, Testing BSM Physics with Gravitational Waves , PoS COSMICWISPers (2024) 007

    G. Villa, Testing BSM Physics with Gravitational Waves , PoS COSMICWISPers (2024) 007

    2024

  104. [112]

    A.R. Frey, R. Mahanta, A. Maharana, F. Quevedo and G. Villa, Gravitational waves from high temperature strings, JHEP 12 (2024) 174 [ 2408.13803]

    2024 arXiv

  105. [113]

    Villa, Gravitational Waves from the Hagedorn Phase , in 29th International Symposium on Particles, String and Cosmology , 10, 2024 [ 2410.07350]

    G. Villa, Gravitational Waves from the Hagedorn Phase , in 29th International Symposium on Particles, String and Cosmology , 10, 2024 [ 2410.07350]. – 22 –

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.